26newjerseys.pdf

New

Jersey's

Gold

Coast:

Revisiting

Public

Access

and

the

Hudson

River

Waterfront

Walkway

Andrew

L.

Strauss

Geraldine

Wang

Once

written offbythe public, the environmental

quality

and

economic

potentialof the

Hudson

River waterfront has

become

a centerpiece of

New

Jersey's

public policydebateinrecentyears.

Over

the last dec-ade, the shoreline ofthe

Hudson

River, stretching 18

miles

from

the

George

Washington

Bridgeto

Bayonne

and

crossingnine denselydevelopedmunicipalities,has

undergone

significant redevelopment.

Formerly

the

domain

of heavyindustry,

warehousing

and

shipping, thewaterfront has long

been

allbutinaccessible to the

general public.

With

the

implementation

of a state

walkway

plan

and

procedures overthelastdecade,the publicis forthefirst time gainingdirectaccess to the water'sedge.

The

Hudson

River Waterfront Conservancy

In1988,

The

TrustforPublic

Land

(TPL),anational,

nonprofit land conservationorganization, created the

Hudson

River Waterfront

Conservancy

(HRWC),

a

multi-jurisdictionalnonprofitorganization.

HRWC

works

toensurethe physicalaccessibilityofthe riverfront

and

activelysupports educationalprogramsdesignedtoinform

the public

about

the

Hudson

River

and

the cultural

and

Andrew

L.Strauss,

AICP/PP

isaproject

manager

inthe

Morristown,

New

Jersey Field Office of

The

Trust for Public

Land

(TPL).

He

receivedhismastersdegreein city

and

regionalplanning

from

theUniversityofPennsylvania. Geraldine

Wang

isaproject

manager

inthe

New

YorkCity

RegionalOfficeofthe

TPL.

Gerryholdsa mastersdegree

inurban planning

from Columbia

University.

The

Trust for Public

Land

isa national, nonprofit land

conservation organization dedicatedtothe protection of

public access

and open

space. Sinceitsfoundingin1973,

TPL

hasprotectedover 600,000acres_ofscenic, recrea-tional, urban, rural

and

wilderness landin

38

states

and

Canada.

TPL

isheadquarteredin

San

Francisco,

CA.

historicheritageofthewaterfrontcommunities.

A

pri-mary

component

ofthis

work

isto facilitatethe

implem-entation

and

management

ofthe

Hudson

River

walk-way.

As

presently constituted, the

HRWC's

board of trusteesis

composed

of landowners,developers, public agencies, citizens

and

nonprofit organizations in the

nine waterfront communities.

The

responsibilities of the

HRWC

include

walkway

planning, monitoringof

development

permits,assisting inthe acquisitionof

new

public access pointsalongthewaterfront (feeor

ease-ment),

and

themonitoring

and enforcement

of

walkway

easements.

Walkway

History

The

Hudson

River

Walkway

(hereinafter referredto asthe"walkway")isdesignedasacontinuouspedestrian

route providing direct public access to

and

along the water's edge.

The

walkway-which

islessthan20percent

complete

today-is intended to run approximately 18 miles,

from

itsintersectionwiththe PalisadesInterstate

Park/George

Washington

Bridge in the north to its

southern terminusatBayonne's Constable

Hook. The

proposed

route brackets the

most

densely populated region of

New

Jersey,

which

isalso thedensestportion

ofthe

New

York

metropolitan area.

From

anypoint

alongthe

walkway

thevisitorenjoysspectacularviewsof

Manhattan,

located

on

theopposite

bank

ofthe

Hudson

River.

The

planned

walkway

routeisintendedto link

exist-ing parks along the waterfront. Connections to paths

above

and below

the

famed

PalisadesCliffs will

eventu-allybe developedtotakebetteradvantage oftheregion's

open

spaces.

Once

complete, the

walkway

will be an important transportation corridor linking all nine municipalitiesalongacontinuouspedestrianspine.

The

walkway

concept hasexisted for severaldecades

the present.

The

walkway was

first

proposed

in the Regional Plan Association's visionary 1966 study,

The

Lower

Hudson.

Nearly twentyyearslater, the concept

was

refinedinthe 1983 report ofthe

New

Jersey

Water-front Study, a legislativelysanctioned body.

The

plan,

then as

now,

required developers to build a public

walkway

in

exchange

fortherightto buildoffice,

com-mercial

and

residentialprojects

on

landtouched bythe

tidesthatlegallybelongstothestate(See, Sidebar:

The

PublicTrust Doctrine). Following the

Commission's

report,the

walkway

receivedstateagency support through

referenceinthe1984

New

Jersey State

Outdoor

Recrea-tion Plan,publishedby the

New

Jersey

Department

of

Environmental

Protection

and Energy

(DEPE).

Inthe

same

year,

DEPE,

assisted by the Philadelphia-based planning

and

designfirm,Wallace,

Roberts

and Todd,

created the plan

and

design guidelines that

form

the basisforthewalkway's presentdevelopment.

Throughout

allofthisplanning activity,it

was

clear

thatthestate'sinterestlay ingettingthe

walkway

built via regulation-inthis case apermit condition or

exac-tion,depending

on

one's perspective-ratherthanthrough

direct stateacquisition.

Over

ninetypercent of the

walk-way's planned 18-milelengthwillbe constructed over

private property presently or formerly flowed by the

tides,

and

thus subject tothestate'sregulatoryinterest.

Since the early 1970s,

New

Jersey's coastal

zone

management

guidelineshave

imposed

on

allwaterfront

development

aduallevelofpermit review

and

approval. Inaddition to the ordinary municipal planning

board

review, the

DEPE's

Division of Coastal

Resources

is

vestedwith the

power

to issuea Waterfront

Develop-ment

Permit to all commercial, office, industrial or

residentialprojects (thelatter

must

exceedadensityof 24 dwellingunits)thatfallwithin1,000feetor thefirst

major

public

highway

orbuiltstructure thatparallelsthe

water'sedge. In recentyears,various legislative

enact-ments and

administrative

rulemaking

procedureshave

resulted in a substantial expansion of

DEPE's

review

and

policymakingrole

under

the Waterfront

Develop-ment

Permitprocess.

One

such expansionincludesthe

definitionof the

Hudson

River waterfrontas

an

areaof

"special state concern," thereby triggering the public access

and

waterfront requirement.

About

the time theWaterfront Study

and

Planning

Commission

released its 1983 report, the

DEPE

ex-panded

therange ofits Waterfront

Development

Per-mittoincludethe

Hudson

Riverwaterfront.

The

expan-sionofstateregulatory

power was

particularlytimelyin lightofrecentchangesin

ownership

and

landusealong

portionsof thewaterfront.

The

vast yard belongingto the JerseyCentral Railroad,

which had

carried

immi-grantswest followingtheirdischarge

from

nearbyEllis Island,

had

been

abandoned

in the early 1970s

and

numerous

factories closed over the last

two

to three

The

Public

Trust Doctrine

The

guidingforce

behind

the

walkway

plan

and

regu-lations is a

unique

and

well-articulated legal concept

known

as the"publictrustdoctrine."

Recognizing

the

special environmental

and economic

value of

tidally-flowed land, the courts of this country, in upholding English

common

law,have

determined

thatstatesclaim

legal title to the land as "trustees" for the public. In

IllinoisCentralRailroad

Company

v. _{People of}Stateof

Illinois(146 U.S.387, 1892),the

Supreme

Court

stated

that: "Itisthesettledlaw ofthiscountrythatthe

owner-ship

and dominion and

sovereignty overlands covered bytidewaters ...belongtotherespective Stateswithin

which

theyarefound, with the

consequent

righttouse or disposeofany portionthereof,

when

that

can

be

done

without substantial

impairment

of the interest of the

public."It

was

the original

purpose

ofthe publictrust

doctrinetopreserve,forall,suchessential

waterborne

uses asfishing,navigation,

commerce

and

recreation.

It issafe to say that thescope

and

limitationsof the

publictrustdoctrine have never

been

preciselydefined.

The Supreme

Court

leftitto individualstatesto legis-late

and

statutorily articulate the limits of the public

trust doctrine.

Each

state maintains the right to sell,

lease

and

regulate privateuse oftidally-flowedlandsor

activitiesoccurring

on

filledlands that

were once

tidally

flowed. Naturally,theinterpretationof the publictrust

variesbystate.

Each

state,however,isrequiredto

per-form

a regulatorybalancingact

whereby

some

uses

must

be

substantially

advanced

without other uses being

substantiallyimpaired.

This balancing act is apparent in the case of the

Hudson

River

Walkway.

Through

its

power

to review

and

issue waterfront

development

permits, the

New

Jersey

DEPE

has requiredthat

Hudson

River

develop-ers

donate

a thirty-foot-widepedestrian

easement

along theentire length oftheirproperty,inaddition to

con-structing

and

maintaining the actual footpath. This requirement forms the basis of

and

is the essential

genius

behind

the waterfront walkway.

decades.

As

a result oftechnological

change

favoring

mechanized

containeroperations,bulk cargofacilities

along the lower waterfront

had

become

obsolete for

industrialuse. Inthe mid-1970s,cargo operationsthat

had once

flourished in places like

Weehawken,

Ho-boken and

Jersey City

moved

southto large,

new

facili-tiesfinanced

and

operated by the Port Authority of

New

Jersey

and

New

York

atPorts

Newark

and

Elizabeth.

By

the early 1980s, loss of traditional waterfront manufacturing

employment

was

greeted by the rapid

expansion of the

New

York

region's servicesector, as

typifiedbythegeographic leapfrogging of

Wall

Street's

famed

"backoffice"

computer

operations.

The

changing

of

new

household

formation

and

a net regional

in-migration.

Given

the availability

and

affordability of

large waterfront building tracts, coupled with ready constructioncapital, the waterfront

was

ratherswiftly

opened

to

new

development

and redevelopment

oppor-tunities. Obsolete land uses coupled with the

easily-available capitalofthe 1980'sswiftly

opened

vastareas

ofthewaterfront to

development and

redevelopment. Regional developers

responded

tothe

new

demograph-icswithlarge-scaleplanning

and

constructionofoffice,

commercial

and

residentialspace alongthe waterfront. Currently, over 17 millionsquare feet ofcommercial/

officespace

and

15,000residential unitsalongthe

water-front are invarious stages ofplanning approval,with approximately 10-15 percentpresently

under

construc-tionor occupied.

The

DEPE,

recognizinga rare opportunity, recently

completed

a conversion ofthe former Jersey Central

freightyard intothe State'spremier

urban

park

on

800

acresjustacross

from

theStatueofLiberty.

The

DEPE

worked

closely with waterfront residents, local, state

and

federalpoliticiansas wellasregionalpublicinterest

groups

who

had been

pushing for a

comprehensive

solution to the freightyard

abandonment

aswell as a

county-wide system ofpublic parks,

walkways

and

access

tofishing piersalongthe

Hudson

River.

Walkway Management

and Use

While

the

DEPE

hasnot

been

flooded with permit

applicationsoverthelast

two

orthreeyears,theagency has

been

increasinglyconfronted with

management-re-latedissues,reflectingthehybridnature ofthewalkway.

It isapark

which

runsthrough multiple landuses

and

hundreds

ofprivateownershipsacrossnine

municipali-ties,withlimited access points.Overseeinga partially-built, publicly-accessible, privately-managed

walkway

has

become

one

oftheState's

most

difficultchallenges.

Located

asitisina heavily

urban

environment,sections

ofthe

walkway

have suffered substantial

amounts

of

vandalism

and

graffiti.

Park benches

have

been

ripped out

and

tossed in the river, lights shattered

and

the

remains of drugactivitystrewnabout. In desperation, a limited

number

ofprivate

landowners

have appealed

and

won

relief

from

the

DEPE

policyof24-hourpublic

access. Recognizingthe vulnerability of

some

isolated

walkway

sections,the

DEPE

has grantedexceptionsto

the24-hourrule for

owners

able todemonstrate

hard-ship.Inthesecases,the State

Park

System's

own

dawn-to-duskruleshave

been

applied.

The

intentofthe

DEPE's

24-houraccess policyisto

enablethe public toenjoythewalkway,asthey

would

a

waterfrontsidewalk,atalltimes.

The

questionsraisedby

the24-hourpolicy,however,arecomplex.Isolated

walk-way

sectionshave tendedto attractundesirable

ties,while other sections—planned

and

designed

more

like backyards thanpublic

promenades

or

sidewalks-intrude

on

the privacyof

homeowners.

Newer

sections

ofthe

walkway

havebenefitted

from

thelessonsofthe pastdecade,asthe

DEPE

refineditspolicy toreflectthe

realitiesofa privately-managed

urban

walkway.

Waterfront

Walkway

Design

Issues

In 1989,

new

designguidelinesforthe

walkway were

incorporated into

DEPE's

original1984

document

Walk-way

Planning

and

Design Guidelines.

While

advisoryin

nature, the

new

guidelines have assisted

DEPE

in its

reviewofWaterfront

Development

Permitapplications.

They

havealso

been

used by developers

and

waterfront

officials forsite planning

and

public access purposes.

The

guidelines establish dimensional, locational

and

overallrequirementsforthewalkway.

The

dimensional requirementscallfora

minimum

thirty-foot-wide

pub-lic

easement

the water's edge, including a

pavement

width ofsixteen feet.

The

walkway must

be located as

close to the water's

edge

as possible

and

include

con-necting

walkways

to furnish perpendicular waterfront

access

from

thefirst publicroadinland

from

the river.

Specificexceptionstothesedimensional requirements

are established for environmentally sensitive areas, industrialareas

and

narrow

waterfrontsites,including

development

on

waterfrontpiers.

InAugust,1990,thiseasementrequirementwas adopted by

DEPE

inregulatoryform, requiringthat:

Allwaterfront

development

alongthe

Hudson

River

shalldevelop,maintain

and

manage

a sectionofthe

Hudson

Waterfront

Walkway

coincident with the shorelineofthe

development

property.

The

devel-opershallby appropriate instrument of conveyance

create a conservation

easement

in favorofthe

De-partment.

The

conservation

easement

shall define the physicalparameters ofthe

walkway and

the allow-ableuses,addressthe

maintenance and

management

duties

and

identify the responsible party.

Develop-ment

of each project's public access system shall

conform

to...the

Hudson

Waterfront

Walkway

Plan-ning

and Design

Guidelines (1984)

and

the

Hudson

Waterfront

Walkway

Design

Standards (1989).

(N.J.AC.

7:7E-3.48(e))

To

facilitate

compliance

with the

easement

require-ment,

The

Trustfor PublicLand, in conjunction with

DEPE,

developed a

model walkway easement which

permitsthe agency,asgrantee of waterfront easements,

totransferthe

easement

toaqualified,charitable land

conservancy(also

known

asa landtrust).

There

are

numerous

advantages to this type of

ar-rangement.

For

one, local land trust monitoring

and

enforcement of conservation

and

public access

ease-ments-especially

easements

thatinvolve multiple

land-Whose Walkway

IsIt

Anyway?

Publicspacesthatare

managed

and

paidforbyprivate dollarshave

an

intrinsicproblem:

Both

users

and owner/

managers

want

control.Acrosstheriverfromthe

Hudson

Walkway,

Battery

Park

City

(BPC)

inlower

Manhattan

is

one

ofthebest-maintained

and most

successfulpublic waterfronts. Its high

maintenance

costs are heavily subsidizedby the surroundingresidential

developments

aspartoftheir

common

charges.

The

BPC

Parks

Corpo-ration,thepark'smanager,hashadtobalance the

demands

ofitsresidentswith those of the parkusers.

As owner

assessmentsincreasewithescalatingcosts, thistaskhas

become more

difficult.

BPC

residents, for the

most

part,have

made

it clear thatthey resent the use of the park bynon-residents.

Many

residentsbelieve thatthe park's rules don'tapply

tothem,

and

haveflagrantlydisregardedsecurityguards

trying to enforce regulations.

There

are instances of

owners

purposefullyliftingtheirdogs overfences

onto

ornamental

flowerbeds, of residents informing users that the park is private,

and arguments

over park use withsecurityguards that have culminated inviolence.

Despite the residents'stance,theParks Corporation's

currentExecutiveDirector,Tessa Huxley, continuesto

planactivities forabroad,citywideaudience.

A

change

in leadership,however, could quickly eliminate those

programs and

confine the Corporation to an

agenda

narrowly focused

on

theinterestsoftheresidents.

owners and

political jurisdictions-is apt to be

more

responsive

and

flexible than parallel monitoring by a

government

agency.

While

thisisnot alwaysthecase,it

is

worth

considering that,

due

to the project's urban

context,current

walkway easements

contain

numerous

affirmative

measures

(suchastheallowance of

demoli-tion,redesign

and

construction of adjacentbuiltareas)

which

mandate

systematic

and

adaptable monitoring

and

enforcement. This

easement

technique is a

depar-ture

from

standard rural easements,consisting princi-pallyofreferences toprohibitedactivities.

The

NIMBY

Syndrome

in

Waterfront

Housing

Developments

Initscurrentform,

DEPE's Walkway

Plan

and

Design

Guidelines failstoaddress adequately therelationship

between

the

walkway and

therange ofpublic

and

private landusealong thewater'sedge.

For

example,

commer-cial

and

officeprojects thataggressivelyseekto attract

thepublic totheirsitesaretypically

more

committed

to

publicwaterfrontaccessthanare

owners

of smallscale,

semi-attached luxury

homes. For

instance, developers of

some

office

and commercial

projects have

incorpo-rated the

walkway

requirements into the preliminary designphase.Thisresultedin

more

integrated sections

Map

oftheHudsonWaterfrontWalkway.

From

thebeginning,housing developers

and

home-owners' associations have

viewed

the

walkway

as an

intrusion

and

a heavy burden.

A

number

ofresidential

walkway

sectionsreflect thisattitudeintheirplanning

and

design.Insteadof

acknowledging

thepresenceof a public walkway, the majority of residential

walkway

sections

appear

to

deny

itsexistence. In

many

instances,

theseparation

between

walkway and

residences is ob-scured,withinadequatetransitionzones

between

pub-licly-accessible

and

privatelands. In contrast to other successful

urban

waterfront

walkways

(See sidebar,

"Whose Walkway

IsIt

Anyway?"),

the

walkways

have

been

enveloped by the residential

development

as an extensionofitsfront-or backyard. Frequently,the

walk-way

segments

along residential

developments

are

de-signedwiththeexpress

purpose

of discouragingpublic

access:signageis nonexistent

and

public accessto the

walkway

is difficult to locate. Waterfront developers

often

market

exclusivity; although

open

space

and

the

esplanadeare used inadvertisingbrochures to attract

homebuyers,

mention

ofa public

walkway

canonlybe

found

buriedinthelegalprospectus.

To

those

who

bought

homes

believing the

walkway

was

private,thepublic's righttoaccessisconsidered an untenableintrusion,

an

infringement of propertyrights

that places

an

unfairliability

and

financial

burden on

homeowners.

Homeowners'

associations have reacted to

DEPE's

access policyindifferingways.Perhapsthe

most extreme example

isthatof

one

associationinthe

Boro

of Edgewater,

which

erected a

"No

Trespassing"

signattachedto a heavilypadlocked fence with barbed

wire.Notifiedby outragedusers,

DEPE

issuedstifffines forthe blatantviolation.

The

homeowners'

association

responded

byinitiatinglegalaction against the Statefor

requiring public access inthefirstplace.

The

case,the

state'sfirstefforttoenforcethedeveloper permit

condi-tions,represents a directchallengetothe

walkway

crite-ria

under

the publictrustdoctrine.

The

suitisexpected

tobesettledout of court withinthe nextfew months.

Over

theyears,developers

have

urgedthe

DEPE

to

reconsider its

walkway and

open

space requirements along developablepiersinthe

Hudson

River.

One

pro-posed

project includes thedesignationofanentirepier

as

open

spacetofacilitatethe transferof

development

potential toadjacent piers.

Other

pier projectsaccept the public access

and walkway

policy grudgingly. In

Weehawken,

the

most

recentlybuiltpier

development

is

Riva Pointe,a luxury residential project. Riva Pointe

has

been

not so subtly designed to discourage public

access.

The

entrancetoRiva Pointeis

up

one

flightof

stairs through a large

ornamental

gate.

There

are,of course,

no

signs stating thatthe walkway,

which

runs

alongthe centerofthepier,is

open

to thepublic.Every

One

last

problem

specificto

resi-dential sections ofthe

walkway

con-cerns thepublic's right togain

perpen-dicularaccesstothewater'sedge,

fre-quentlyby walking throughasite

from

the nearest public road. Portions of

the waterfront are accessible to the

publicat present, althoughaccess to

many

ofthe privately

owned

parcelsis

difficultornon-existent.

The

Port

Au-thority

Trans-Hudson

(PATH)

rail

system provides

immediate

access to thewaterfrontatseveral points.

Some

bus service is available, but for the

most

part the waterfront is currently accessibleonly bycar. Parking along

the waterfront can be difficult,

par-ticularlynear

PATH

stations.

The

case

forperpendicularaccessis

made

more

compelling

when

consideringlarge,but

isolated waterfront parcels,

where

the

walkway

ends

abruptly,with

no

connectiontoother

segments

ofthe

walkway.

On

severaloccasions, representativesof the

DEPE,

Trust for Public

Land

and

the

Hudson

River Waterfront

Conservancy

attempted to gain access to

these

walkway

sections.

They

were

turnedback repeat-edlybysecuritystaff,

who

were

often ill-informedabout

the accessrequirements.

Where

alternateaccesstothe

walkway was

available,

more

oftenthan notit

was

byan

unmarked

and

thoughtfully disguised route.

A

Public

Purpose,

Privately-Implemented

Walkway

With

assistance

from

the

Hudson

RiverWaterfront Conservancy, the

walkway

hasemerged,sectionby sec-tion, in

one

of the nation's

most

urban

and

densely-populated areas. In its policymaking role, the

DEPE

continues to face

new

challenges.

Developing

an

18-milelinearwaterfrontpark planacrossnine

municipali-tiesrepresents thefirst,

and

arguablyleastdifficult,step

towards realizing the vision that

was

originally

pro-moted

almostthirtyyears ago.

The

walkway's

comple-tion

and

ultimatesuccess as a publicamenity hinges

on

several additionalfactors,including a

sound

realestate

market and

supportivepoliciesrelating to

walkway

use,

management

and

enforcement.

The DEPE's

1984

walkway

planreflected the

heady

times

and optimism

ofaperiod

marked

by

development

activity

and

public-private partnerships-a time

when

government

regulatorsenjoyedsubstantialleverageover

waterfront projects

and

permitapplications.Today,with

development

alongthe

"Gold

Coast"

down

toatrickle,

withforeclosures

and

auctionsdotting the shore,

prog-ress

on

the

walkway

has

come

to a virtual halt, held

hostage bythe recession.

GrundyParkinJerseyCity offersfine viewsof Manhattan'sFinancialCenter.

In its present incarnation, the

walkway

is almost

entirely the product of private

development

activity,

lackingthe continuity

and

financialstrengthofa

govern-ment-sponsored

project.

Because

DEPE's

walkway

requirementistriggeredbya

change

inlanduse,parcels

without

development

plans

may

remain

withouta

walk-way

for years. Conversely, isolated parcels that have

been

developed

under

the

walkway

requirementhave,in

some

instances, createdparks plaguedby

management

problems.

The

image

ofacontinuous"stringofpearls"

ispowerfulindeed,but todaythat

image

must

acknowl-edge current

market

realities.

Management

and

Security

Although

the

walkway was planned

as

one

continu-ouspark,

no

mechanism

currentlyexiststoensure

con-sistent

management

and

securityalong thewaterfront.

One

owner

may

fail to provide even

minimal

mainte-nance, while another, seeking to

encourage

public ac-cess,

may

have

an

expensive

management

program.

Commercial owners

typically prefer to retain control

and

responsibilityforthe

management

ofthe

walkway

(i.e.,public security as wellas

maintenance

of the walk-way, street furniture, plants

and

lighting fixtures) to

ensureastandard ofquality consistentwiththeir

devel-opment.

Recognizing the state's limited

powers

to

monitor

and

enforcepublic access

and

management

ofthe walk-way,theTrustforPublicLand,inconjunction withthe

HR

WC

and under

contracttothe

DEPE,

drafted asetof

proposed

management

guidelines for the

walkway

in

1991.

These

guidelinessetforthexplicitstandardsthat

all

walkway owners must

follow.

The

guidelineswill

be

A

walkwaysection_oftheLincolnHarbormixed-useredevelopmentareainWeehawken.

accompanying

the guidelines strongly

recommends

the

establishment of penalties for

non-performance

of

management

duties,with the

Conservancy

monitoring

all

walkway

easements.

Given

themultiplepoliticaljurisdictions

and

relative

youth ofthewalkway, it

comes

as

no

surprise that a

recognizable system ofpolice authority

and

response hasyet todevelop.

A

stronglocalpolicepresencealong

the

walkway

couldlimitliability

and

costs

assumed

by owners, while also protecting the rights of users in

sections

where

private security forces

may

seekto

pre-vent or unreasonably restrict use.

With

each

walkway

owner

and

municipality struggling to oversee its

own

lands,

and

little or

no

coordination of security, the questionofadequatesecurityalong the waterfrontremains

unresolved.

Liability

Under

DEPE's

walkway

requirement,liabilityis

re-tainedbythelandowner. Thisisnotasheavya

burden

for office

and commercial

projects,

which

carry

comprehen-siveliabilitypolicies,asitisforresidential projects

and

waterfront

condominium homeowners'

associations.

For

the

homeowners'

associations, liability insurance is

typically

one

of thelargerexpenses.

As

one would

ex-pect,

many

residential projectshave sought tocontrol

their liabilitycostsby limitingor excludingthe public

from

walkway

use. In

an

unusually effective counter-measure,the State recentlyenactedthe PublicAccess

Liability

Law

(P.L.1989c.172).

The

lawstates that, for

landowners

whose

property

is freely accessible by the public, liability is limited to casesof gross negligence. This statuteisexpected toreduce

liabilitylitigationand, conse-quently,

landowner

insurance

costs.

Conclusion

From

both

aplanning

and

implementation

standpoint, the objectiveofconstructing acontinuouspedestrian

walk-way

along the water's

edge-through nine separate politi-caljurisdictionsand hundreds ofprivate land

ownerships-isnothingshortof breathtak-ing

and

groundbreaking. Whiletheformal

DEPE

walk-way

effort isjustshort ofits

tenth birthday

and

less than

twenty percentcomplete(thus

leading

one

to project its build-out at fifty years), it

remains proofpositive that the

walkway

is currently

under

construction. Triggeredsolelyby regulatory

re-quirements, the

walkway

stands as testimony to the delicatebalance

between

a publiclyconceived

and

fos-tered amenity that is built,

managed

and

insured by myriadprivateinterests.

A

number

of

walkway

observershave askedthe ques-tion

whether

it

would be

possible to acceleratethe

com-pletionofthe

walkway

throughdirect statepurchaseor

funding ofsections. Others have

wondered

whether

a

50-yearbuildoutissatisfactory.Regrettably, it

was

the

initialpolicyof

DEPE

and

other

government

decision-makers

to build the

walkway

principally through the

processofregulatory exaction.

From

thevantagepoint

ofthe 1980s,thisposition

seemed

eminentlyreasonable.

Of

late, however,

walkway

planners, local citizensand

their elected representatives have

begun

to press for directpublicexpenditureforacquisitionofneeded

walk-way

sections.Severalgroups have

gone

publicwith pro-posalsforpurchase ofspecific"gapsites"or

promenade

areas that can better link existing

walkway

sections.

With

lastyear's reauthorizationofthe federal Surface

Transportation Act,

walkway

planners

and

advocates are

hoping

to secure a significant portion ofthe $71

million available to

New

Jerseyoverthe nextfiveyears

forqualifyingpedestrian

and

alternative transportation

projects.

There

is

no

questionthat

when

it

comes

tothe